Interested in buying a Gary Grigsby game - but have some questions...

[SigUp]

ORIGINAL: Revthought

Having worked in the video game industry and made video games, I disagree with you. Plus, your wrong. It's built on the DC engine, for which the first two titles contained nothing of the sort. And I'm not suggesting an exact copy of DC:B with card play.

You had decision cards in Warsaw to Berlin with certain effects enacted when you play them. This relationship system is just an extension of that decision system.

A lot of the mechanics are there already, or present in other GG titles.

Name me a concrete way of how to implement it. Play a decision a suddenly pop up 20.000 vehicles? That's not how this system works. If you want to convince me, don't go meta by saying "it is possible and it will be better", name me the mechanics that are already there, name me examples of how it could be done.

By the way, the fantasy argument is the biggest hypocritical argument you can make. While I love WiTE you don't get more fantasy than complete and total operational freedom. Moving units between army groups for the Germans and letting them focus on whatever objective they want, particularly in 1941 is a joke when compared to reality. As is letting the Soviet player endlessly retreat without putting up a fight for population centers--Stalin would have more than just removed me from command if I were a Soviet commander in WW2 and did the things I do in game

You don't seem to get it, operational freedom (to a certain degree) is built into it from the design perspective because it is an operational wargame. Play sports games and you have much more control than a real team on the pitch would have. Play a politics simulation and you have much more control than a real politician would have. And if you want to restrict operational freedom, easy, do it via victory conditions. Take WitW, you don't want to bomb V-weapons sites? Get hit with negative VPs. You don't want to land in Italy in 1943? Get hit with negative VPs. Your invalidation of this argument is rather ridiculous. Using your line of thought I could brush away criticism at giving the Germans a fleet of jet aircraft in 1941 by saying "hypocritical".

Of course there is an effect. That's what you balance the game around, trade offs for decisions. Decisions don't make or break anything, just like in WiTP.

The effect of adding a few Panzer IV is miniscule. Tell me, how many games have you seen where the German side runs out of tanks? I've seen far more occasions of the opposite being true. The trade-off between time spent on developing and testing such a system and the actual gameplay effect is way out of whack.

PS. The German player, unless he wins, in 1941or maybe 42 is playing for a win by keeping the Russians out of Berlin for as long as possible. That's no different than the Japanese players position in WiTP.

The Germans in WitE will come far closer to a 260 auto-victory than the Japanese in a stock scenario in WitP AE. Give the Germans potential to optimise production and you may very well push them above that step. The power balance is far different between the Japanese and American sides in WitP. There is a reason why so many people in AE multiplayer play one of those scenarios that significantly beef up the Japanese side.

Frankly, there are so many existing things in the system that could (and some should) be improved that correction of these alone will improve gameplay significantly. And these things should be tackled and ironed out and not some obscure political and production system.

[NagyGL]

Thanks for the great hints.

ORIGINAL: invernomuto

If you decide for WITW, I might suggest you to buy also Operation Torch.

I did just that - waiting for the boxed edition, takes some time to Europe [:)]

ORIGINAL: solops

For time and playability, try From Eagle Day To Bombing the Reich. It will not get you your naval fix, though.

Thanks for the suggestion, I have not heard about this before. But I think I like combined arms too much for this [;)]

[darkhelix]

How did you get on with WITW?
Was it how you expected? was it harder/ easier?
How much have you played it since you had it?
How long do the 'shorter' scenarios take?
Do you have to wait 'long' between go's? (more than a few minutes)

Thanks

[NagyGL]

ORIGINAL: darkhelix

How did you get on with WITW?
Was it how you expected? was it harder/ easier?
How much have you played it since you had it?
How long do the 'shorter' scenarios take?
Do you have to wait 'long' between go's? (more than a few minutes)

Thanks

Due to being unexpectedly busy with work commitments lately, I have played only approx. 15 hours so far (+ a few hours of reading the Manual while commuting ).

This 15 hours were enough to play the Operation Husky scenario (Allied invasion of Sicily, 7 turns) twice and play Battleground Italy until turn 19. I, however, did not do a lot of micro-management / optimization I could have, as I am immersing myself step-by-step (e.g. I did not reorganize planes between Air HQs and Support Units among divisions until into my third game). Also, these are scenarios with limited scope, a PBEM game covering the whole Western Front would take significantly more time - but others are better prepared to provide benchmarks for that.

Waiting time was a minute or two at maximum, have no complaints there at all.

The game is actually a bit easier to understand than I expected (... if you really read the Manual and browse the WitW forum here, that is), but harder to master due to the amount of choices both tactically and strategically.

Considering all, I like it very much. I enjoy to take an hour to map Order of Battle for myself and think about how to rationalize it. I like that I have meaningful strategic and tactical choices to make (e.g. planning an attack against a city or a front-line). I also like the amount of details that I can discover about units, logistics, order of battle, nationality of units, etc. - all in line with the books I have read about the War in the West, greatly enhancing immersion.

Things I dislike a bit: the air game seems to be a little bit tedious for me (having to do it at the beginning of each turn, but with no spectacular effect) and the action is a bit one-sided so far (Axis units mostly retreating North instead of putting up a fight), but this depends on the scenario I guess.

[zakblood]

How did you get on with WITW?

it was easier than WITE was at the start, then again the development and design has moved on

Was it how you expected? was it harder/ easier?

easier to learn, just as hard, but not harder to master

How much have you played it since you had it?

WITE less than 2 weeks in total, WITW i'm a tester so 200+ hours and i gave up counting

How long do the 'shorter' scenarios take?

shortest, less than a few hours

Do you have to wait 'long' between go's? (more than a few minutes)

longest wait on a average run of the mill pc i7 mid ranged etc is first turn under 4 mins for longest battle / campaign, a lot less for shorter ones, then each turn is less, first turn is always longest anyway on WITE or WITW

[darkhelix]

Thanks for your feedback both. Much appreciated.

[NotOneStepBack]

I will give my opinion as I own WITE and WITW. I helped beta test WITW. That said, I think WITE is a better buy and a better game overall.

WITW has a better air model and logistics for sure, but for someone coming from Panzerkorps (which I also love), WITE is a better sell. It will be easier to pick up, there is more action and it will get your feet wet in a more realistic operational game. I also think that while WITW had lofty goals it just doesn't have the same epic feel as WITE, and the scale is so much smaller that it seems like a lot of turns there is little to do in WITW.

[Gilmer]

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

We are not working on expanding WitW to cover France 1940. We are working on WitE2.0.

I think we would all like a grand european campaign from 1940 - 45 but the challenges to deliver it are considerable so don't hold your breath.

+++++10000000!!!!!

I am thinking it is going to be EPIC!!

[SheperdN7]

I know I'm a little bit late for this but I just want to give my 2 cents as I am an owner of both WITP:AE and WITE. Both games have great communities so finding help or a PBEM game isn't that hard to do. I find that WITE has a better manual (they're both good but WITE explains some things a little easier).

WITP:AE Grand Campaign is more than a thousand turns as each turn is a day BUT!!!!! One thing that I have noticed is that the time that you have to take to complete a turn varies on your goals and objectives, for instance the first turn is DAUNTING but for a few weeks it is actually quite quick (done in 30 minutes or less) then it'll jump up to 6+ hours again. Its very inconsistent. WITE is the opposite. Every turn I do is about 3.5 hours and it is consistently that amount of time.

Way more micromanaging in WITP:AE.

Better air war in AE than in WITE and it gives you more "customization" with your squadrons (ability to rotate pilots and send instructors to teach skills)

AE is focused on air war and naval battles but ground combat is way better in WITE.

I've found that for pure entertainment value I like AE more but keep in mind I think I just feel that way because I'm more familiar with that game.

At the end of the day, they are both 10/10 games and well worth the money. If one is on sale, get it. Doesn't matter which one as they are both AMAZING.

I've never tried WITW but looking at screenshots and threads on that forum it seems like a scaled down version of WITE.

Final thought is that in all the time I've played both games I'ge found that AE is more "unstable" in terms of winning the game. 1 major battle that doesn't go your way can affect the entire war effort for the rest of the game. In WITE, you're "afforded" some strategic mistakes when playing as either side.